Just wanted to let you guys know of Lifebeat! It is a non-profit organization that supports education about STDs including HIV and AIDS. They team up with the music industry to raise awareness and support the HIV/AIDS Community.
They also offer the 'Golden Ticket' sweepstakes which allows individuals to win 2 tickets to see a concert each month. This month it is the Red Hot Chili Peppers in Philly on May 11!
Win 2 Tickets to see the Red Hot Chili Peppers on Friday, May 11!
http://fb.me/1yNiX07x3
Yeah...that's probably what happened.
Wednesday, April 25
Tuesday, August 23
Rare 5.9 Earthquake
Facebook walls are exploding with confused young adults on the east coast. According the the United States Government, it registered overall as a 5.9 with epicenter in Va. It was felt as far north as N.H and in the office buildings in NY.
It has been said to be the result of Michael Jackson rolling over in his grave due to the release of Justin Beiber's new single.
It has been said to be the result of Michael Jackson rolling over in his grave due to the release of Justin Beiber's new single.
Monday, August 22
Chris Brown and Fox News Respect
Of course, This is no laughing matter. That's why the record stores refused to sell Chris Brown's greatest hits album with Rhianna on the cover.
I do not respect Chris Brown. It seem like he was punished for his crimes by all legal standards, so the jest on Mr. Levy's part was a bit harsh; however, it seems that perhaps celebrity status should provide better role models for all of us. Do you think that the felony was easily overlooked by the public?
Anyways, do you feel that Chris Brown deserves forgiveness? Was Mr. Levy out of place commenting on air? Should Chris Brown expect to be targeted by dark humor?
Saturday, July 23
Getting political
The Tea Party movement does not typically, if ever, endorse something in which I do. Usually, it is around the opposite of my personal preference, but I can understand from where a lot of their opinions stem. Recently, however, I discovered the following quote:
Now, I will agree that homeowners do have a financial investment in a community, but do not believe that this is the only form in which a vested interest can arise. According to Wikipedia, "the homeownership rate in the United States in 2009 remained similar to that in other post-industrial nations with 67.4% of all occupied housing units being occupied by the unit's owner." One third of homes owned, are not inhabited by the owner of the building.
White Americans are significantly more likely to own a home along with married couples. Young, single Americans are some of the least likely to own a home with females being the least likely. The idea that homeowners have more of a right to vote than any other person singles out minorities and the youth. This idea that our society should center around home owners further separates the tea party movement from minorities and young adults. They have already seemed to alienate the youth with their lack of support for same-sex equality, lack of investment in education facilities such as taxes that support schools. The tea party movement is simply aimed at the baby boomers beginning retirement now.
While my personal opinions tend to lean fiscally conservative and socially liberal, there are no candidates that really support this agenda. I do support the idea of welfare programs, such as food stamps and health care because I know people without those who still deserve to have a good life yet still believe The US, in my humble opinion, should try to conserve money, though, especially in this time of significant debt and through reducing spending in other areas. Most of the Millennials, the gen-y young adults of which I am a part of, tend to support the LBGT community with about two-thirds of the group believing in a deity. Politicians would be better off if they also looked into the views of young adults and made us feel as though we deserve to be heard, which is where, I believe, Obama succeeded.
Now, I rambled on there to show my political affiliation to some extent and for readers to understand my point of view. Given the current movement to increase identification required at voting facilities, my question is this, though, do you believe that the right to vote should be limited in any way? Another politician likened this movement to a poll tax being required for citizens, do you believe these requirements reduce the already low turn-out for certain segments of the population?
-Tea Party News Radio“The Founding Fathers originally said, they put certain restrictions on who gets the right to vote. It wasn’t you were just a citizen and you got to vote. Some of the restrictions, you know, you obviously would not think about today. But one of those was you had to be a property owner. And that makes a lot of sense, because if you’re a property owner you actually have a vested stake in the community. If you’re not a property owner, you know, I’m sorry but property owners have a little bit more of a vested interest in the community than non-property owners.”
Now, I will agree that homeowners do have a financial investment in a community, but do not believe that this is the only form in which a vested interest can arise. According to Wikipedia, "the homeownership rate in the United States in 2009 remained similar to that in other post-industrial nations with 67.4% of all occupied housing units being occupied by the unit's owner." One third of homes owned, are not inhabited by the owner of the building.
White Americans are significantly more likely to own a home along with married couples. Young, single Americans are some of the least likely to own a home with females being the least likely. The idea that homeowners have more of a right to vote than any other person singles out minorities and the youth. This idea that our society should center around home owners further separates the tea party movement from minorities and young adults. They have already seemed to alienate the youth with their lack of support for same-sex equality, lack of investment in education facilities such as taxes that support schools. The tea party movement is simply aimed at the baby boomers beginning retirement now.
While my personal opinions tend to lean fiscally conservative and socially liberal, there are no candidates that really support this agenda. I do support the idea of welfare programs, such as food stamps and health care because I know people without those who still deserve to have a good life yet still believe The US, in my humble opinion, should try to conserve money, though, especially in this time of significant debt and through reducing spending in other areas. Most of the Millennials, the gen-y young adults of which I am a part of, tend to support the LBGT community with about two-thirds of the group believing in a deity. Politicians would be better off if they also looked into the views of young adults and made us feel as though we deserve to be heard, which is where, I believe, Obama succeeded.
Now, I rambled on there to show my political affiliation to some extent and for readers to understand my point of view. Given the current movement to increase identification required at voting facilities, my question is this, though, do you believe that the right to vote should be limited in any way? Another politician likened this movement to a poll tax being required for citizens, do you believe these requirements reduce the already low turn-out for certain segments of the population?
Monday, July 18
New birth control methods to help prevent a new generation.
It's undeniable how female birth control has changed how sex is viewed. It has become something to pass time and enjoy with someone who may not be the love of your life. Unfortunately, there have always been risks associated with birth control in females. Due to internal reproductive organs, physical barriers require surgery or invasive maneuvering to install where hormonal methods lead to potential risk for blood clots, heart attack, stroke, and drastic changes in mood and libido. Men also have very few ways of knowing if a female is, in fact, on birth control at the time of insemination. Due to these problems, there have always been a desire for male birth control methods. Fortunately, these do not seem to be too far away!
New methods include pills and physical barriers beyond condoms, which ruin much of the sexual experience for both parties. Soon, it seems, both males and females will be responsible for taking care of their reproduction so that the issue of childbirth is not decided by only one of the partnership. While these methods will not prevent STIs, they will do much to change the way sex is portrayed as the Pill did originally.
Male contraceptive pill (various types):
May cause reversible infertility by altering the lipid metabolism of sperm by using calcium channel blockers to prevent fertilization.
Vitamin A may be blocked from converting into retinoic acid, which would prevent sperm production.
Adjudin may cause sperm to be released prematurely without being functional.
Hormonal methods such as depo-provera with testosterone gel or injection.
These methods are all different, but have shown promising results in rats. While rats are not always a good comparison to how they would work in humans, see Zavesca, they do give an indication as to how they might perform.
And then the cool one by my standards is the RISUG, which stands for reversible inhibition of sperm under guidance. This is a polymer that allows sperm to pass through it in the vas deferens, but inhibits it's ability to fertilize an egg. It is a minor procedure that can be removed by another injection that washes the device away.
Basically, I wonder, guys would you be willing to try any of these forms of contraception? And females, would you like for guys to also share some of the responsibility?
References:
http://msmagazine.com/blog/blog/2010/07/02/a-pill-for-men-still-five-years-away/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21505053
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reversible_inhibition_of_sperm_under_guidance
Sorry for poor reference quality!
New methods include pills and physical barriers beyond condoms, which ruin much of the sexual experience for both parties. Soon, it seems, both males and females will be responsible for taking care of their reproduction so that the issue of childbirth is not decided by only one of the partnership. While these methods will not prevent STIs, they will do much to change the way sex is portrayed as the Pill did originally.
Male contraceptive pill (various types):
May cause reversible infertility by altering the lipid metabolism of sperm by using calcium channel blockers to prevent fertilization.
Vitamin A may be blocked from converting into retinoic acid, which would prevent sperm production.
Adjudin may cause sperm to be released prematurely without being functional.
Hormonal methods such as depo-provera with testosterone gel or injection.
These methods are all different, but have shown promising results in rats. While rats are not always a good comparison to how they would work in humans, see Zavesca, they do give an indication as to how they might perform.
And then the cool one by my standards is the RISUG, which stands for reversible inhibition of sperm under guidance. This is a polymer that allows sperm to pass through it in the vas deferens, but inhibits it's ability to fertilize an egg. It is a minor procedure that can be removed by another injection that washes the device away.
Basically, I wonder, guys would you be willing to try any of these forms of contraception? And females, would you like for guys to also share some of the responsibility?
References:
http://msmagazine.com/blog/blog/2010/07/02/a-pill-for-men-still-five-years-away/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21505053
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reversible_inhibition_of_sperm_under_guidance
Sorry for poor reference quality!
Saturday, July 16
History
Have you ever went through your own writings from years ago and wondered what made young you think that was a reasonable thing to write?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)